Windows 8 Myths

A lot has been written about Windows 8 and how it’s either Microsoft’s biggest success or its worst failure since Vista. Admittedly some of this has been written by yours truly. However, I’ve come across a lot of statements that just don’t jibe with my own experiences. Like most of you, at the current time, I don’t have any touch-enabled hardware. So running Windows 8 is basically just like Windows 7. I have Windows 8 installed on several desktops and have been using it on a daily basis since its GA release in October 2012. I know how it works.

Most normal (non IT) people I know are interested in Windows 8. But when they see it and first try to use it they are confused and don’t like it. The IT crowd catches on to it pretty quickly, but for the most part they say they see no advantage over Windows 7 (which by all accounts has become the new XP). Not unexpectedly, the exceptions are people who are ardent Microsoft supporters. Fortunately being an independent publication means that we can provide opinions that aren’t colored by the Microsoft party line. Here are my thoughts about some of the myths that I’ve run into about Windows 8.

You might as well get used to Windows 8 because it’s inevitable. Windows 8 is most certainly not any more inevitable than Windows Vista was. Like Windows Vista, Windows 8 is off to a slow start. But I expect that Microsoft is going to be coming out with an update that helps address some of main pain points in the initial release. So if you don’t like Windows 8, just hold off, because a subsequent version is going to get better.

Windows 8 is unusable without a touch screen. Windows 8 is different from any previous version of Windows. At first it’s confusing, and in my opinion in day-to-day use it’s not as productive as Windows 7. However, Windows 8 is definitely very useable. While not as efficient as Windows 7, you learn how to cope with its differences. Basically, I just wound up living on the desktop side and junking up my desktop with a zillion shortcuts to make up for the missing Start menu. Start8 or Classic Shell can also help make Windows 8 more livable.

Windows 8 is faster than Windows 7. Nope. Sorry it’s not. But it’s not slower either. To me, Windows 8 seems identical to Windows 7 in terms of speed. If there’s any difference, I can’t see it, and I’m looking. Maybe Windows 8 is faster if you’re running on new faster hardware, but then that’s really the hardware. Right?

Windows 8 boots faster than Windows 7. This is true. Windows 8 boots faster than Windows 7, but so what? The last time I booted my desktop was well over a month ago. I doubt many people are spending a lot of time worrying about how long it takes their desktop to boot.

The new Start screen is better than the old Start menu. I’ve heard this myth from some Windows 8 supporters, but I just don’t see it, at least not on non-touch devices. The old hierarchical Start menu provided quick access to all of your programs. The new flat Start screen requires paging to see what’s there, and it doesn’t show everything anyway. It also lacks jump lists and Recent item options and quick access to My Computer, Networking, the Control Panel, and Administrative Tools. To be fair, tiles can show you dynamic content, but gadgets did that as well.

Windows 8 is not for the enterprise. Microsoft may be marketing Windows 8 to the consumer (perhaps not altogether successfully because Microsoft is no longer a consumer-oriented company), but Windows 8 inherits all of the Windows 7 enterprise features like full AD support, Bitlocker, Windows To Go, DirectAccess, BranchCache, and Applocker. Windows 8 can definitely be used successfully in the enterprise.

Old Windows programs won’t run. Microsoft has only themselves to blame for this one. It’s true that the ARM-based Windows RT version of the OS will not run the old x86-x64 Windows programs. However, Windows 8 and Windows RT are really different things. The vast majority of x86 and x64 programs run just fine on Windows 8. I ran into a few devices that aren’t supported, but all the programs and games I ran worked fine. Sometimes you have to wonder why they even named Windows RT “Windows.” After all, the UI formerly known as Metro is designed to run one App at a time, not to have multiple windows open.

I have no doubt that touch is the way of the future, but I also know we’re just not there yet. Microsoft designed Windows 8 with a bit too much eye on the future and forgot about where the rest of the world is really at. Those are some of the biggest myths about Windows 8 that I’ve run across. If you have some Windows 8 myths that you’d like to dispel, share your comments here.

Discuss this Article 8

Touch is the future?
On handheld devices (phones) and tablets, perhaps. It's a great way to interact with those devices.
On desktops; no. In order to get the best viewing experience from a monitor 21" and under, the monitor should be placed at arms distance. For larger monitors, they should be even farther away.
How am I going to touch them? They should be just out of reach.
And when will we get touch screens that don't carry smudges? This is a problem on phones, tables and touch-capable monitors.
After years of keyboard-and-mouse induced carpel tunnel syndrome, will we now look forward to shoulder and rotator cuff issues from holding our arms straight out in order to take advantage of our shiny, smudged, new touchscreen monitors?

I'm one of those IT professionals and I recommended to everybody around me asking for my advice to stay away from Win8. Removal of start menu as well as forcing everybody into Metro is huge mistake. Let users decide if they want start menu and if they want to boot directly into desktop. Microsoft behaves like Apple which tells me that it knows better then what I do how I use my computer. That's the reason a lot of people stay away from Apple products, the same goes for this "change" unwellcomed by majority of IT pros I talked to and myself included. Win8 would be great OS if Microsoft would ask users what they like instead of telling us what we want.

I have to say I'm in the "The new Start screen is better than the old Start menu" boat, but I think it's just a matter of personal preference. I've found it to be more than an adequate replacement for the start menu. Trying to bring back the "old" start menu or trying to force it to work like Win7 just because "that's how it's always been" is just more work and not necessary. I actually wasted more time in WIn7's start menu - the very same hierarchical groupings actually slows you down on a click-by-click basis, especially if it's *not* in your Recent groupings.
"...quick access to My Computer, Networking, the Control Panel, and Administrative Tools" - Just right-click in the bottom left, where the start screen hover is. You get most of that in one context menu, rather than having to dig for it in the start menu.
As for it booting faster... you're right about most people not noticing on desktops, but you leave out nearly every other device that could run Win8. I have it installed on an older Dell laptop, and to save battery life, I usually shut down when I'm not using it. Boot time is essential for those on the go.

I'm with you, QuentinH. Even though I have a touch-screen display, I still use the Start screen from the Desktop the way I used to use the Start menu. Windows key, type first few characters, press Enter. Since Vista, it's been a rare event when I'd fuss with navigating through a maze of submenus.

Windows 8 is huge step back for effective and productive work. It was spoken so much that I would mention only about few very important things: shadow copy (previews version) has dramaticly changed (we need additional dy
Isk for it!); there isn't XP Mod any more (I have programs that work on Windows 7 but don't on Windows 8 (!!!)
So after 4 months of working on Windows 8 I have Windows 7 again.

I am using Window 8 since many days now. I even bought a Surface in order to see and feel the differences between a laptop and a Surface on Win8.
I am searching for the start menu often, but I guess I'll be used to live without it.
I know Windows since NT3.1 and I have lived with all of the changes over the years of Windows UI.
I have developed a way to work that allows me to find quickly what I want, whatever Windows release I am working on: Command lines!
For the technical part it is still good, but for the end user point of view it is not.
So my guess is for workers (EndUser) moving from W7 to W8 will be tough without the Start Menu.
That said, the Surface part might help a lot moving from iPad to Windows 8 RT (Home User). Specially when many (Mostly High position people) wants a slate like iPad and get access to the corporate date files and print as if it was a laptop...
And I really love the fact the my live account can remember all of the apps I am using. SkyDrive is good too for sharing data between devices.
My wife is using iPad AND a laptop with Windows 7. My plan is to replace both machines with ONE Surface Pro. Only the lack of the Start Menu might be more difficult to accept. My bet is that she'll love the fact that when someone will ask her slate for accessing the Web, she will be more comfortable to lend it with a guest account, than having to check over the shoulder what the guest is doing with its iPad. Of Course the tiles are really easy to use. So some quick config of her most used apps, and I am sure that it will be fine, even better.
Change management will be the key for the end-user.
OS maintenance and troubleshooting is the key for tech support, and there many ways that W8 will help us, Refresh and reset, File History etc.
But for the rest, I really love the OS, seems to be OK with hardware that are 5 years old as per now...
That was my humble share on Windows 8

Win8 boots faster? Yes but they cheated. If you don't run any update that affects the core [good luck on patch Tuesday!] it hibernates a portion of the OS. Hell, on my netbook with an SSD, Win 8 came up in a flash. Unsure if it was even 10 seconds to the login screen. You also have to wait a bit. After you install stuff and remove, some of the stuff you left may leave behind some crap that isn't required [ever see what a Lexmark inkjet printer leaves behind?]. My Win 7 desktop was quite fast in the beginning. 3 years later it is so-so.
"While not as efficient as Windows 7, you learn how to cope with its differences..." Errr. that's the point. Microsoft went the other way for non-touch screen users. You either now have to point your mouse cursor to corners to do things or remember a couple dozen shortcuts.
I recommend Classic Shell. Start8 isn't bad either.
Here's a rediculous thing: Want to change your login screen picture? Since these screens began in Vista, you went to the Control Panel, then User Accounts, click on option to change your picture and select the image. Right? Not with windows 8. For whatever REALLY dumb movie, that is moved to PC Settings. Why on earth did they do that?
Need to use just the desktop? You need to re-associate everything you open with a non-Windows 8 built-in application. Prefer to open a JPG, re-associate it with a [regular] application. Pain in the butt otherwise to go back to the desktop.
Just hunted today for a decent [not too pricey] laptop that wasn't Windows 8. Getting a bit hard to find.

May I offer a different type of article instead of these fluff ones? How about "What Win8 Should Have?" and/or "What Windows Next Should Have?". Steve Sinofsky was right to build touch into Win8, but missed the subtle intuitive part.

I really like the non-UI parts of Win8 which are great, but in truth people are living with cognitive dissonance with Win8 as the UI is wrong for the type of interface. Peoples brain, especially ones that have ego, insist on thinking that it's them that's not getting it. The reason that the experience is hard and uncomfortable *must* be the learning curve of this new interface. But is it really?

Well I don't know. Let's look at passive touch vs active touch. Passive touch is where the screen senses the finger and responds, where as active touch (touchy-feeling as I like to think of it) is where electrostatic pulses of electricity emit to the finger so that both you and the screen both sense the interaction. This technology is available. What this allows, is for you to feel the close button but not have to press it; feel the edge of the window but not have to drag it; gives you the pixel perfect input to be efficient, etc.

Now back to the point with Win8, passive touch only works well on kiosk or single page applications (ie. iOS, android.) or on small screens where you have to page to each other screen, but you have a fixed size area. Win8 on the other hand does a side scroller, which is another form of a view *into* (aka Windows) the area. One of the unfortunate side effects, is that since you conceptually understand you are viewing *into* something, you want to but can't scroll in both directions. This is intuitively wrong. Another adverse side effect is the wasted space above and below the side scroll area. (you can only zoom either way so much). This then leads to a design of only flat levels and scroll right to infinity. This is wrong as one gets overwhelmed reading each tile as the number increase, plus you can't perform index searches. (Just watch how people muck up 1+1-1*0-1+1 calcs when there are >7 numbers) Your brain can better process hierarchy of data levels (groups of items <= 7).

Tangent Start~>
That leads to another bug for ages since Windows 1 of not having the Windows key and/or plus F1 key display a HUD of the names of parts of the screen. How do you learn something new if you do not know how to articulate what you are seeing to clearly identify the problem?
<~End

This is made worse for the pixel perfect input devices like the mouse. I want to do things like drag, move, select, zoom so when mouse is used put back the scroll bars. Oops, can't do that as you would want the vertical bar as well; doh! The mouse is handicapped because of the fat finger limitations of passive touch, where as active touch you get the pixel perfect connection to the computer back, so can then now fully use the area. Active touch in the first versions can be in the form of a glove but the technology is able to be in the surface itself.

The final aspect missed (or purposely ignored to favour metro) is the idea of adding input detection. One could have defaulted to metro when passive touch input was detected and the normal Windows screen when the mouse input was detected, but that's another story.

So what do I want in Windows Next? How about something new like Sensor Detection; so that the computer responds to my presence and there is an interaction rather than commands only. That might get the work PC's off WinXP, as history shows consumers must love the OS way before businesses will consider taking it on. If I can't use it at home on non-critical things, why would I use it at work where things must get done.